White House petition for more chargers

[WetEV]

The LEAF top speed is 40 mph for distance travel.

Yes, and would require more than just "a better battery". Tesla Model S goes faster, due to a larger battery (more $) and higher power QC and TMS. All three would be needed.

+1. I can't imagine anything more idiotic than having the government installing QCs every x number of miles on I-80 from Reno to Wendover across Nevada, given the current limited ranges of affordable BEVs.

I can list a few things slightly more idiotic that the government has done in the past (Vietnam war, for example), and imagine that there might be even worse currently, but yes, this would be an contender.

 

[WetEV]

We are talking about real-world range.

Real-world, you wouldn't charge at a QC to 100% or it wouldn't be a 20 minute charge. And you wouldn't plan on arriving with less than 20%, and if you did it wouldn't be a 20 minute charge. So over a long trip like from Vancouver BC to California border, drive for 40 minutes, stop for 20 minutes for charging. Cover about 40 miles every charge cycle and every hour, best case. Real world is worse.

 

[TomT]

+1

Real-world, you wouldn't charge at a QC to 100% or it wouldn't be a 20 minute charge. And you wouldn't plan on arriving with less than 20%, and if you did it wouldn't be a 20 minute charge. So over a long trip like from Vancouver BC to California border, drive for 40 minutes, stop for 20 minutes for charging. Cover about 40 miles every charge cycle and every hour, best case. Real world is worse.

 

[UBUYGAS]

I guess I joined the wrong forum. Where's EV forum with the forward thinking EV drivers!?!!!

Right now I have to use my frigin ICE car twice a month to go to two clients that are 150 mile round trip.

I want a QC's on the garden state parkway so I can do it in my leaf. I don't want to keep my ICE for two damn clients.

I just don't understand why anybody would think it would be a bad idea to have QC's on highways.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not planning to drive to Florida from NJ. That would be stupid. I just want to extend my range that little bit.

Clue-less people. I guess the next generation will get it right. I was born too early.

 

[GRA]

+1. I can't imagine anything more idiotic than having the government installing QCs every x number of miles on I-80 from Reno to Wendover across Nevada, given the current limited ranges of affordable BEVs.

I can list a few things slightly more idiotic that the government has done in the past (Vietnam war, for example), and imagine that there might be even worse currently, but yes, this would be an contender.

I was limiting myself to the context of promoting and enabling EVs going forward, or the list would get impossibly long! :lol:

 

[GRA]

I guess I joined the wrong forum. Where's EV forum with the forward thinking EV drivers!?!!!

Right now I have to use my frigin ICE car twice a month to go to two clients that are 150 mile round trip.

I want a QC's on the garden state parkway so I can do it in my leaf. I don't want to keep my ICE for two damn clients.

I just don't understand why anybody would think it would be a bad idea to have QC's on highways.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not planning to drive to Florida from NJ. That would be stupid. I just want to extend my range that little bit.

Clue-less people. I guess the next generation will get it right. I was born too early.

Plenty of forward-thinking EV drivers here, but most of them have had their BEVs long enough to get past the 'Gee, I want to use it for everything' stage and accept what the cars are realistically practical for now. And also what's economic. Charging providers are still struggling to figure out how to make QC'ing pay, so the last thing we need is to install a bunch of them in places that almost no one would ever use because they value their time. Nor do we need to provide any more hostages to the anti-EV blogosphere.

Take a look at the BC2BC Rally that Tony ran: 1,500 miles in 9 days, or an average of just 167 miles/day. To be sure there were some down days in there so it could have been done several days faster, but it's not a practical use of a BEV if you place a value on your time - you could easily do that in two days solo in an ICE (1.5 days if you were in a hurry), if you just wanted to get to your destination.

For QCs to make any sense for long road trips, the cars themselves need more range. The Tesla S has it. The RAV4EV is at the low end of the necessary range, and it cries out for QC capability to make shorter road trips practical. None of the sub-$40k MSRP cars has enough range to be practical for anything beyond a single enroute QC to extend their daily radius, if the destination rather than the journey is what's important to you.

You're fairly new here. Believe me, your enthusiasm for boosting infrastructure and using BEVs for everything was common here in the early days. Once you see how inconvenient using the car is for trips beyond about 125-150 miles radius, I expect you'll realize why most of the people here aren't ready to push this. But if someone were to start a petition to install QCs liberally around the 10 best metropolitan areas for LEAF sales, well, they'd all be on board:

http://insideevs.com/top-ten-10-sales-markets-for-the-nissan-leaf-show-plug-in-hotbeds-for-us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As it happens, Numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 are all fairly well covered by QCs, so we need to concentrate right now on #s 3, 6, 9 and 10 while filling in some gaps in the first group.

 

[fastcharge]

Surprised by a lot of the comments on here. A few thoughts:

I think people should view this as a way to locally increase the range of their vehicle not as a means to drive on 1,000 mile journeys. Maybe 1 day out of a month, you want to see a relative in a nearby city. Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to go see them with your Leaf instead of having to buy (or rent) a second car?

Level 2 chargers are slow for public use. That is all that really matters. We need to transition to something faster.

If you are for electrification of automobiles so that we can get off oil, you should be for this putting in more chargers.

Many people say you shouldn’t put chargers in and quote Tesla as the model of what you should do. Tesla is putting a charging network in. Even though their cars get exceptional range, they see the benefit in giving people options.

There are 168,000 gas stations in the US even though ICE cars have much better range. Not sure how that would be explained.

Even if cars had a better range, you would still like to be able to fill up when it is convenient. There are 168,000 gas stations.

If you support level 2 charger home tax credits, you should also think about being for other people who don’t have a house to charge at but still want to stop using ICE.

The range of EV’s will get better as more and more money gets poured into the industry. People will still want to be able to fill up quickly, wherever they happen to be. 50 miles is actually way to far apart but you have to start somewhere.

It sounds like a lot of people want to perfect the train but not install any tracks. You need both.

Sure there are charging standard issues but you aren’t voting to install something tomorrow. All that the petition asks for is for the administration to think about it and provide a response.

The petition will not get 100,000 signatures but people are talking about DC chargers and that is a good step in the right direction.

http://cars.chicagotribune.com/fuel-efficient/news/chi-plugin-car-fastcharging-infrastructure-20130805" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/07/30/white-house-petition-create-fast-charging-ev-network-to-accelerate-electrification/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.hybridcars.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[davidcary]

As a relatively new MNL member, this discussion is a bit about disagreement for the sake of disagreement. Nothing wrong with that but it does turn some people off.

The petition is overly ambitious and that is its fault. Of course everyone here wants to see more DC chargers but maybe not in the middle of nowhere. Since much of the Interstate highway system is in the middle of nowhere, it does seem like a waste of money. And not just a small waste of money....

But now you have someone in NJ (still the most densely populated state I believe) thinking that people are opposing DC chargers along the Garden State Parkway. I don't think anyone on MNL would think that is a bad idea. Now - some might oppose federal funds being used for it - but outright opposing it is unlikely.

Of course road trips of 200+ miles are not really practical but at the same time 150 certainly is with a well placed DC charger and moderate speeds.

A better petition might be to place QCs every 30 miles in NJ. Now that makes a whole lot of sense. Another option would be every 50 miles in areas with density over 1000 people per square mile. I just checked and my country is 800 so maybe we should change that to 500 per square mile..... Anyway - such a clause would save 90% of the cost and provide 80% of the utility.

As an aside, I personally think there should be no subsidy for installing a charger in your own house. Increase the EV credit if you want or better yet, tax gas more.

 

[hyperlexis]

Such small thinking throughout the thread -- honest to goodness, does everyone think that Nissan will keep the Leaf in stasis? The current puny little battery will be all there is -- forever? Just cause your car can barely go 40 minutes down the highway before needing a charge means every Leaf does? Or that new Leafs will be so hobbled in coming years? I fully believe that within two to three years the range of the Leaf will climb to more practical, longer distances. Perhaps not fancy Tesla range, but perhaps 100 or 150 miles per charge? Certainly more road-trip ready, if L3s are actually made widely available.

Putting in a nationwide network of BEV L3 stations on major US interstates, NOW, may not help you drive from NY to CA as fast and easy as in an ICE , but it would at least make it physically possible, even now with the current Leaf. And, for upcoming EVs, with longer and longer range, such chargers, spaced every 40 or 50 miles, at least at all highway rest-stops, would be even more useful for long distance travel.

The fact is the biggest selling vehicle in the U.S. is the F-150 pickup truck. Not installing a well-thought, national L3 network, including in towns in 'the middle of nowhere' (like Tesla is now doing!) would severely restrict EV adoption, and relegate EVs to being considered impractical play toys of the wealthy and/or big city dwellers with only very short commutes.

Tell everyday, one-car family car buyers they can use an EV to take weekend road trips to the country, or even (with patience) drive coast to coast, then EVs stand a much, much better shot at mainstream adoption. Otherwise such folks will buy a Prius, Volt or ICE.

The selfish, it's all about my limited-range Leaf, now, mindset, loses sight of the big picture -- increasing the national adoption of EVs over time, for all the benefits they bring to everyone.

If the US government really cares so much about cleaner air, CO2, so-called 'energy independence', and keeping cash otherwise spent on foreign oil here at home, then prudently installing, a thoughtfully designed network of L3s at rest stops or other location along the U.S. federal highway system is a perfectly reasonable means of doing so for the pubic good. Private companies have simply proven unwilling or unable to act, outside very limited areas, given competition and thin profit margins on actual charging.

 

[WetEV]

Such small thinking throughout the thread -- honest to goodness, does everyone think that Nissan will keep the Leaf in stasis? The current puny little battery will be all there is -- forever?

Frankly, yes.

My expectation is that while there will be longer range BEVs for sale, a significant fraction of BEVs with be city range cars with similar range to the Leaf. The Leaf really hits the city car market space squarely. Enough range, comfortable seating for five...

Why? The city range care meets a very common need at the most reasonable price.

The price gap between long range BEVs and city range BEVs will decrease, for sure, but isn't going away.

 

[palmermd]

That's OK. I don't need those non-voting closed mined people to Vote, there have been 35 more votes in the Past 3 hours. I'll just have to do all the campaigning myself.

Well, that courtesy, attitude and well-reasoned position will certainly win you supporters to your cause! :lol:

Except that we did vote. There was not a place to put a NO vote, so not signing is placing a vote. I wish you well in your pursuit of votes for this cause, but I don't want a government operated fueling network. If I want a long range EV, I'll purchase a Tesla. The Leaf is just fine for around town.

 

[hyperlexis]

That's OK. I don't need those non-voting closed mined people to Vote, there have been 35 more votes in the Past 3 hours. I'll just have to do all the campaigning myself.

Well, that courtesy, attitude and well-reasoned position will certainly win you supporters to your cause! :lol:

Except that we did vote. There was not a place to put a NO vote, so not signing is placing a vote. I wish you well in your pursuit of votes for this cause, but I don't want a government operated fueling network. If I want a long range EV, I'll purchase a Tesla. The Leaf is just fine for around town.

So you will, of course, then be writing a check back to the taxpayers of the United States and your state, who gave you tens of thousands of dollars to buy an EV and L2 charger in your private home?

You know, your own private, taxpayer-funded car and fueling network, for you and you alone, of course.

Cause you deserve welfare for your own private, taxpayer-funded car and fuel station, just for being you!

 

[palmermd]

So you will, of course, then be writing a check back to the taxpayers of the United States and your state, who gave you tens of thousands of dollars to buy an EV and L2 charger in your private home?

You know, your own private, taxpayer-funded car and fueling network, for you and you alone, of course.

Cause you deserve welfare for your own private, taxpayer-funded car and fuel station, just for being you!

Are you saying that because I vote no on something and then it passes anyway, that I do not have the opportunity to get the benefit of the bill/law? All I said was that I vote no on the Government spending money building a network of charge stations. If they build it of course I'll use it, but I think that this network of charge stations will be built with or without the Government help. I believe it will get built better and for less money if a business builds it rather than the government. Look at Tesla Supercharger network for example. Somebody will figure out how to do it for ChaDeMo or SAE-DC and it will get done eventually.

 

[Bluebull]

I'm not sure why, but I have been watching this thread silently, and now I can no longer resist becoming one of Lasareath's "idiots".

I love LEAF. 2011 and now 2013 are my favorite cars in all my 60 years of driving. But ...

The LEAF top speed is 40 mph for distance travel.

That's a scientific fact, and there is no way around it without a new and better battery. This is not a touring car, and even if you spend a Bazillion dollars putting in QC stations every 100 yards on every road in the nation, you still will be limited to an effective speed of about 40 mph for long trips.

I can't believe that even 1% of the nation's population find such a restriction reasonable. So it is not reasonable that the general public can be sold on accepting the LEAF as a touring car. But that is exactly what we be trying to sell them on by making a huge investment in inter-city QC stations.

No, I haven't signed the petition, and I have no intention of doing so. The nation has far more important uses for its money.

Ray

Just curious, but where do you get your 40 mph figure? In my Leaf I can go 80 miles traveling 55 mph and that is in the dead of summer with temp at 100+ F.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I'm not sure why, but I have been watching this thread silently, and now I can no longer resist becoming one of Lasareath's "idiots".

I love my LEAF. My 2011 and now 2013 are my favorite cars in all my 60 years of driving. But ...

The LEAF top speed is 40 mph for distance travel.

That's a scientific fact, and there is no way around it without a new and better battery. This is not a touring car, and even if you spend a Bazillion dollars putting in QC stations every 100 yards on every road in the nation, you still will be limited to an effective speed of about 40 mph for long trips.

I can't believe that even 1% of the nation's population would find such a restriction reasonable. So it is not reasonable that the general public can be sold on accepting the LEAF as a touring car. But that is exactly what we would be trying to sell them on by making a huge investment in inter-city QC stations.

No, I haven't signed the petition, and I have no intention of doing so. The nation has far more important uses for its money.

Ray

on this we simply must agree to disagree. too many discussions on this and for your situation I am sure you are correct just as I am correct in mine.

I contend that I can go no more than 28 miles from my house (that if you must be told is NOT an estimate!) and still have a frequent need for a QC especially if its in the right spot (roughly 1-3 times a week and that is an estimate...) and that would greatly enhance my LEAFs usability.

now, does that prevent me from driving my LEAF? rarely...very rarely. Does it increase the level of compromise in convenience? oh ya most definitely. but I will still do it. will others?

well, I am not a normal type of person and I have more to follow on that subject

 

[fastcharge]

I took a look. There have been signatures from people in 48 of 50 states. Does anyone know someone from one of these states that would sign it?

North Dakota, ND
Wyoming, WY

That would mean there was support from people all of the country which would be pretty cool.

 

[fastcharge]

I took a look. There have been signatures from people in 48 of 50 states. Does anyone know someone from one of these states that would sign it?

North Dakota, ND
Wyoming, WY

That would mean there was support from people all of the country which would be pretty cool.

Someone from Wyoming just signed it. That just leaves North Dakota and all 50 states will have signed.

 

[TomT]

Only 99,444 more signatures needed! :roll:

Someone from Wyoming just signed it. That just leaves North Dakota and all 50 states will have signed.

 

[fastcharge]

Only 99,444 more signatures need! :roll:

Depends on what your goal is. Rome wasn't built in a day.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

What I don't understand is, why isn't Nissan more ahead on QC infrastructure?

They've beaten all the competition to a national market, by a couple of years now, with an affordable family size EV. They planned that out and executed.

They've budgeted sizably for stateside production. If an oil shortage occurred now, they'd be a giant leap ahead in grabbing that opportunity.

They know how much infrastructure could help them, where is the budgeting and planning for that? Two or three years after introduction?

A Nissan Leaf dealer has to invest in the diagnostic machinery, but not a QC? Or even given a free one?

If they'd just invest in QC's at dealers, every dealer, that would be enough to start with, showing their commitment and support big time. And since there are more dealers where populations are denser, would provide good beginning coverage as well.

Maybe we should be petitioning Nissan.